• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

2024-25 Toronto Maple Leafs General Discussion

Ozzie said:
I think the screw up goes back to earlier years of negotiating a 2 year NMC at the end of the contract, and not moving him prior to it kicking in.

Leafs have zero leverage at that point.

It's a bargaining failure and asset management failure that is entirely on the shoulders of Dubas and Shanahan.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's another colossal management screw up. if Marner wanted all the money he doesn't get NTC is last year of the deal.

Maybe this is a cultural change that Leafs management can implement. Maybe a team rule where you only get NMC/NTC if you sign for the max term? And still I'd put partial NTC in final year.

At some point you have to say to the player do you want to be here or not?

I keep looking at what Vegas has accomplished by not being afraid of making a bad move, quite frankly the Eichel deal could have easily blown up in their face. Leafs management seem paralyzed by the fear of making a bad/bold move.
 
It's early, but Grebenkin and a 1st for Laughton is looking like a disaster.

Especially if you consider losing Dewar and Timmins too, yes they were salary clearing moves for mainly Carlo, but it all happened on the same day.

Dewar, Timmins, Grebenkin, Minten, 1st, 1st.

We really need Carlo and Laughton to be significant contributors.
 
WhatIfGodWasALeaf said:
It's early, but Grebenkin and a 1st for Laughton is looking like a disaster.

Especially if you consider losing Dewar and Timmins too, yes they were salary clearing moves for mainly Carlo, but it all happened on the same day.

Dewar, Timmins, Grebenkin, Minten, 1st, 1st.

We really need Carlo and Laughton to be significant contributors.
Click to expand...
I'm not crazy about the Laughton deal - hate parting with 1st rounders. I looked at him last year and revisited this year. He's better than what we've seen so far. It was a seller's market ...

Here's the thing that has me on edge:
Best case is the Leafs chances to win a Cup are 10% (very likely less than that based upon recent play)
So there is a 90% or more chance there will not be a parade. Blunt facts.

If there is no parade, logically, one would change the roster for another run in the Matthews "window" (UFA 3 yrs after this).
16 of the 22 guys on the roster have contracts for next season.
Holmberg, Robertson, Lorentz don't but they're not earth shattering talent - on the low end of the cap totem pole.
RFA Knies they have to re-sign
The only two UFAs to shake things up are Marner & Tavares. With few assets, the only way to replace them is on the UFA market - which is pretty lean already and will be leaner by July 1st.
We don't have a lot of young assets to help swing trades.

It is not impossible to adjust the roster, obviously. I'm sure they will. But if this roster craps the bed in the playoffs, they've got a real uphill battle to materially correct it. And their D is starting to get older.
 
dappleganger said:
At some point you have to say to the player do you want to be here or not?
Click to expand...
I don’t get where you’re going with this. What says ‘I want to be here’ more than a no trade clause? Look in baseball, you’ve got players who have opt outs built into their deals so they can leave or renegotiate their contract.

I’m just not following the logic of this particular point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top